159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14526674)
1. Performance of a new, liquid-based cervical screening technique in the clinical setting of a large French laboratory.
Bergeron C; Fagnani F
Acta Cytol; 2003; 47(5):753-61. PubMed ID: 14526674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Performance of a fluid-based, thin-layer papanicolaou smear method in the clinical setting of an independent laboratory and an outpatient screening population in New England.
Díaz-Rosario LA; Kabawat SE
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1999 Sep; 123(9):817-21. PubMed ID: 10458830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of conventional and liquid-based Pap smear methods in the diagnosis of precancerous cervical lesions.
Honarvar Z; Zarisfi Z; Salari Sedigh S; Masoumi Shahrbabak M
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2022 Aug; 42(6):2320-2324. PubMed ID: 35579303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. ThinPrep versus conventional Papanicolaou smear in the cytologic follow-up of women with equivocal cervical smears.
Negri G; Menia E; Egarter-Vigl E; Vittadello F; Mian C
Cancer; 2003 Dec; 99(6):342-5. PubMed ID: 14681941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Follow up of atypical squamous cell Pap smears in Iraqi women.
Pity IS; Shamdeen MY; Wais SA
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2012; 13(7):3455-60. PubMed ID: 22994777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Performance of carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and HPV16 or HPV18 genotyping for cervical cancer screening of women aged 25 years and older: a subanalysis of the ATHENA study.
Castle PE; Stoler MH; Wright TC; Sharma A; Wright TL; Behrens CM
Lancet Oncol; 2011 Sep; 12(9):880-90. PubMed ID: 21865084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population.
Koliopoulos G; Nyaga VN; Santesso N; Bryant A; Martin-Hirsch PP; Mustafa RA; Schünemann H; Paraskevaidis E; Arbyn M
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2017 Aug; 8(8):CD008587. PubMed ID: 28796882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of the ThinPrep Pap test in clinical practice. A seven-month, 16,314-case experience in northern Vermont.
Papillo JL; Zarka MA; St John TL
Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):203-8. PubMed ID: 9479341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Liquid-based cytology and conventional cervical smears: a comparison study in an Asian screening population.
Cheung AN; Szeto EF; Leung BS; Khoo US; Ng AW
Cancer; 2003 Dec; 99(6):331-5. PubMed ID: 14681939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Atypical squamous cells-cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (ASC-H): a result not to be ignored.
Barreth D; Schepansky A; Capstick V; Johnson G; Steed H; Faught W
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2006 Dec; 28(12):1095-1098. PubMed ID: 17169233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Diverse glandular pathologies coexist with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion in cyto-histological review of atypical glandular cells on ThinPrep specimens.
Kumar N; Bongiovanni M; Molliet MJ; Pelte MF; Egger JF; Pache JC
Cytopathology; 2009 Dec; 20(6):351-8. PubMed ID: 18522633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Low-grade pap smears containing occasional high-grade cells as a predictor of high-grade dysplasia.
Power P; Gregoire J; Duggan M; Nation J
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2006 Oct; 28(10):884-887. PubMed ID: 17140504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Neural-network-assisted analysis and microscopic rescreening in presumed negative cervical cytologic smears. A comparison.
Mango LJ; Valente PT
Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):227-32. PubMed ID: 9479345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cervical cancer screening with liquid cytology in women with developmental disabilities.
Kavoussi SK; Smith YR; Ernst SD; Quint EH
J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2009; 18(1):115-8. PubMed ID: 19072727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Does liquid-based technology really improve detection of cervical neoplasia? A prospective, randomized trial comparing the ThinPrep Pap Test with the conventional Pap Test, including follow-up of HSIL cases.
Obwegeser JH; Brack S
Acta Cytol; 2001; 45(5):709-14. PubMed ID: 11575648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Conventional cervical cytologic smears vs. ThinPrep smears. A paired comparison study on cervical cytology.
Ferenczy A; Robitaille J; Franco E; Arseneau J; Richart RM; Wright TC
Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(6):1136-42. PubMed ID: 8960019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparative analysis of conventional Papanicolaou tests and a fluid-based thin-layer method.
Limaye A; Connor AJ; Huang X; Luff R
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2003 Feb; 127(2):200-4. PubMed ID: 12562235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Qualifying the cytologic diagnosis of "atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance" affects the predictive value of a squamous intraepithelial lesion on subsequent biopsy.
Genest DR; Dean B; Lee KR; Sheets E; Crum CP; Cibas ES
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1998 Apr; 122(4):338-41. PubMed ID: 9648902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Diagnostic value of endocervical curettage for detecting dysplastic lesions in women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) Papanicolaou smears.
Poomtavorn Y; Suwannarurk K; Thaweekul Y; Maireang K
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2014; 15(8):3461-4. PubMed ID: 24870740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. CytoRich liquid-based cervical cytologic test. Screening results in a routine cytopathology service.
Vassilakos P; Griffin S; Megevand E; Campana A
Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):198-202. PubMed ID: 9479340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
